N/THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY POUNDED BY JAMES LOEB, LL.I EDITED BY ↑T.E.PAGE,C.H,Lr.D E. CAPPS PH.D. LI W. H. D. ROUSE, LITT. D. PLATOS REPUBLIC
\D /THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY FOUNDED BY JAMES LOEB, LL.D. EDITED BY + T. E. PAGE, C.H., urr.D. / E. CAPPS, PH.D., LL.D. W. H. D. ROUSE, utt.d. PLATO'S REPUBLIC I
PLATO THE REPUBLIC WITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY PAUL SHOREY, Pu. D, LL. D. LITE D PHoFExsoMt o GBEEK, UNIVERSITY OF CRICAnO IN TWO VOLUMES BOOKS I-V CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD
PLATO THE REPUBLIC WITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY PAUL SHOREY, Ph.D., LL.D., Lrrr.D. PROFESSOR OF GREEK, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAOO IN TWO VOLUMES I BOOKS I— V CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD MCMXXXVII
First printed 1030 ised and Reprinted 1037 23..53 Printed in Great Britain
First printed 1930 Revised and Reprinted 1937 Z-i>.\\.Sb Printed in Great Britain
CONTENTS OF VOLUME I PAnE INTRODUCTION The Test The Translation BOoK I BOoK II 108 Book IV
CONTENTS OF VOLUME I PAOE Introduction ^,jj The Text ...... xlv The Translation jjjj Book I. Book II. Book III. Book IV. Book V. k 2 108 200 314 424
INTRODUCTION ANALYSEs of the Republic abound. a The object of this sketch is not to follow all the windings of it ideas, but to indicate sufficiently their literary frame- work and setting. Socrates speaks in the first person, as in the Charmides and the Lysis. He relates to Timaeus. Hermocrates. and an unnamed fourth person, as we learn from the introduction of the Timaeus, a conversation which took place"yester davy'' at the Peiraeus. The narrative falls on th day of the Lesser Panathenaea, and its scene, like that of the Timaeus, Proclus affirms to be the city or the Acropolis, a more suitable place, he thinks for the quieter theme and the fit audience but few than the noisy seaport, apt symbol of Socrates contention with the sophists. b The Timaeus, composed some time later than the Republic, is by an afterthought represented as its Dialogues of Plato, vol iii. pp. xvi-clvi plato, rolL iamp Boyd, An I iro Richard Lewis ietlershep rocius, In Rem p. vol. i. p. iF: 3 Kroll. cf also VOL, I
INTRODUCTION Analyses of the Republic abound." The object of this sketch is not to follow all the windings of its ideas, but to indicate sufficiently their literary framework and setting. Socrates speaks in the first person, as in the Charmides and the Lysis. He relates to Critias, Timaeus, Hermocrates, and an unnamed fourth person, as we learn from the introduction of the Timaeus, a conversation which took place " yesterday " at the Peiraeus. The narrative falls on the day of the Lesser Panathenaea, and its scene, like that of the Timaeus, Proclus affirms to be the city or the Acropolis, a more suitable place, he thinks, for the quieter theme and the fit audience but few than the noisy seaport, apt symbol of Socrates' contention with the sophists.* The Timaeus, composed some time later than the Republic, is by an afterthought represented as its * Jowett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. iii. pp. xvi-clvii ; Grote'a P/a<o, vol. iv. pp. 1-94: Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, iii. pp. 54-105 ; William Boyd, An Introduction to the Republic of Plato, London, 1904, pp. 196 flF. ; Richard Lewis Nettleship, Lectures on the Republic o/ P/a<o, Ix)ndon, 1904; Ueberwe^- Praechter, Geschichte der PhiJosophie, Altertum, pp. 231-234 and 269-279 ; Wilamowitz, Platan^ i. pp. 393-449 ; etc. » Cf. Proclus, In Rem P. vol. i. p. 17. 3 KrolL Of. also Laws, 705 A. VOL. I b Vii
INTRODUCTION sequel. And the Republic, Timaeus, and unfinished Critias constitute the first of the" trilogies in which Aristophar Byzantium arrang Platonic dial The Timaeus accord v with a brief recapitulation of the main political and social features of the Republic. But nothing can be The dramatic date of the dialogue is plausibly assigned by Boeckh e to the year 411 or 410. Proof is impossible because Plato admits anachronisms his dramas. e Socrates tells how he went down to the peirac to attend the new festival of the Thracian Artemis Bendis, and, turning homewards, was detained by Diogenes Laertius, iii. 61, and Zeller, Philosophic anenst of the universe by the creater (s Timn. is iv. pp. 47 ff, especially 448. p. 263, n. 1, argues that this is the owett and Campbell, vol. iii. pp. 2-3: Zeller stances of p. 4s9. Arguments are based on the circu at Ath as early 499-499 B.c. But he thinks plato s the first celebration" may refer to special ceremonies firs instituted circa 4Il
INTRODUCTION sequel. And the Republic, Timaeus, and unfinished Critias constitute the first of the " trilogies " in which Aristophanes of Byzantium arranged the Platonic dialogues." The Timaeus accordingly opens with a brief recapitulation of the main political and social features of the Republic. But nothing can be inferred from the variations of this slight summary.*' The dramatic date of the dialogue is plausibly assigned by Boeckh '^ to the year 411 or 410.'* Proof is impossible because Plato admits anachronisms in his dramas.* Socrates tells how he went down to the Peiraeus to attend the new festival of the Thracian Artemis, Bendis/ and, turning homewards, was detained by " Cf. Diogenes Laertius, iii. 61, and Zeller, Philosophie der Griechen*, vol. ii. pt. i. pp. 494 f., n. 2. " Proclus tries to show that the points selected for emphasis are those which prefigure the constitution and govern- ment of the universe by the Creator (In Tim. 17 e-f). His reasoning is differently presented but hardly more fantastic than that of modern critics who endeavour to determine by this means the original design or order of publication of the parts of the Rep^iblic. Cf. further Taylor, Plato, p. 264, n. 2. " Kleine Schriften, iv. pp. 437 ff., especially 448. ** A. E. Taylor, Plato, p. 263, n. 1, argues that this is the worst of all possible dates. ' Cf. Jowett and Campbell, vol. iii. pp. 2-3 ; Zeller, vol. ii. pt. i. p. 489. Arguments are based on the circumstances of the family of Lysias, the presumable age of Socrates, Glaucon, Adeimantus and Thrasymachus, and the extreme old age of Sophocles. f The religion of Bendis may have been known at Athens as early as Cratinus's Thraitfai {4'iS B.C.), Kock, Fragmenfa, i. 34. Mommsen, Fe.ste der Stadt Athen, p. 490, cites inscriptions to prove its establishment in Attica as early as 429-428 B.C. But he thinks Plato's " inasmuch as this was the first celebration " may refer to special ceremonies first instituted circa 411 b.c
INTRODUCTION a group of friends who took him to the house of Polemarchus, brother of the orator Lysias. a A goodly brother was assembled there, Lysias and a younger Euthydemus--yea, and Thrasymachus of Chalcedon, Charmantides of the deme Paiania, Cleitophon, and conspicuous among them the venerable Cephalus, crowned from a recent sacrifice nd a prefiguring type of the happy old age of the ust man. A conversation springs up which Socrates guides to an inquiry into the definition and nature of justice($30 D, 831 C, 3S2 B) and to the conclusion that the conventional Greek formula,"Help your friends and harm your enemies," cannot be right (835 E-886 A), since it is not the function (eyou, 335 D) f the good man to do evil to any hist See Lysias in any classical dictionary. He returned asaCs se inferred with certain eredsamkeit, i. p 347)infers from Lysias, 12. 16 that Polem- onkessatisided het as hen sh sosias taPes do part in the noted Phaedr. 266 c Zelle PI 4 Apparently a partisan of Thrasymachus. His name is tion 邮 Cf. 329 D, 331 A with 613 B-c
INTRODUCTION a group of friends who took him to the house of Polemarchus, brother of the orator Lysias." A goodly company was assembled there, Lysias and a younger brother Euthydemus—yea, and Thrasymachus of Chalcedon,* Charmantides of the deme Paiania,'' Cleitophon,'* and conspicuous among them the venerable Cephalus, cro^\•ned from a recent sacrifice and a prefiguring t\"pe of the happy old age of the just man.* A conversation springs up which Socrates guides to an inquiry into the definition and nature y of justice (330 d, 331 c, 332 b) and to the conclusion that the conventional Greek formula, " Help your friends and harm your enemies," cannot be right (335 E-336 a), since it is not the function (epyov, 335 d) of the good man to do evil to any. The sophist " See Lysias in any classical dictionary. He returned to Athens from Thurii circa 413 b.c. Polemarchus was the older brother. He was a student of philosophy {Phaedr. 257 b). Whether he lived with Cephalus or Cephalus with him cannot be inferred with certainty. Lysias perhaps had a separate house at the Peiraeus (c/. Phaedr. 227 b). The family owned three houses in 404 B.C. (Lysias, Or. 12. lS),andBlass{Attische Beredsamkeit, i. p. 347) infers from Lysias, 12. 16 that Polemarchus resided at Athens. Lysias takes no part in the conversation. He was no philosopher {^Phaedr. 257 b). * A noted sophist and rhetorician. Cf. Phaedr. 266 c, Zeller*, i. pp. 1321 ff. ; Blass, Attische Beredsamkeit^, i. pp. 244-258; Sidgwick, Jc-Mrn. o/ PA//. (English), v. pp. 78-79, who denies that Thrasymachus was, properly speaking, a sophist ; Diels, Fragmented, ii. pp. 276-282. ' Blass, op. cit. ii. p. 19. '* Apparently a partisan of Thrasymachus. His name is given to a short, probably spurious, dialogue, of which the main thought is that Socrates, though excellent in exhortation or protreptic, is totally lacking in a positive and coherent philosophy. Grote and others have conjectured it to be a discarded introduction to the Republic. • Cf. 329 D, 331 A with 613 b-c
INTRODUCTION Thrasymachus, intervening brutally($S6 B), affirms alist thesis that lly the advanta of the (politically) stronger, and with dramatic touch silenced(350 c-D), much as Callicles is refuted in the Gorgias. The conclusion, in the manner of the minor dialogues, is that Socrates knows nothing($+ c) For since he does not know what justice is, he cannot a fortiori determine the larger question raised by just life or the unjust life is the happie ither the first half or the whole of this book detached would be a plausible companion to such dialogues as the Charides and Laches, which deal in similar manner with two other cardinal virtues temperance and bravery. It is an easy but idle and unverifiable conjecture that it was in Plato's original intention composed as a separate we perhaps a discarded sketch for the Gorgias, and onl by an afterthought became an introduction for the not, in view of the extent of the Republic, dis- proportionate in length, That is all we know or can know The second book opens with what Mill as a monument of the essential fairness of Plato rful restatement of the th Thrasymachus by the brothers of Plato, Glaucon and Adeimantus. They are not content with the dialectic that reduced Thrasymachus to silence (358 B) They demand a demonstration which will convince the youth hesitating at the cross-roads of virtue and xxV, note 6 b Cf. Dissertations and Discussions, vol iv. p. 311
INTRODUCTION Thrasymachus, intervening brutally (336 b), affirms the immoralist thesis that j ustice is only the advantage of the (politically) stronger, and with humorous dramatic touches of character-portrayal is finally silenced (350 c-d), much as Callicles is refuted in the Gorgias. The conclusion, in the manner of the minor dialogues, is that Socrates knows nothing (354 c). For since he does not know what justice is, he cannot a fortiori determine the larger question raised by Thrasymachus 's later contention (352 d), whether the just life or the unjust life is the happier. Either the first half or the whole of this book detached would be a plausible companion to such dialogues as the Charmides and Laches, which deal in similar manner with two other cardinal virtues, temperance and bravery. It is an easy but idle and unverifiable conjecture that it was in Plato's original intention composed as a separate work, perhaps a discarded sketch for the Gorgias, and only by an afterthought became an introduction for the Republic.'* It is now an excellent introduction and not, in view of the extent of the Republic, dis- proportionate in length. That is all we know or can know. The second book opens with what Mill describes as a " monument of the essential fairness of Plato's mind " ^—a powerful restatement of the theory of Thrasymachus by the brothers of Plato, Glaucon and Adeimantus. They are not content with the dialectic that reduced Thrasymachus to silence (358 b). They demand a demonstration which will convince the youth hesitating at the cross-roads of virtue and " Cf. infra, p. xxv, note 6. ' Cf. Dissertations and Discussions, vol. iv. p. 311
INTRODUCTION vice(S65 A-B)a that it is really and intrinsically better to be than to seem just b It is Plato's method always to restate a satirized and controverted doctrine in its most plausible form efore proceeding to a definitive refutation. e As he himself says in the Phaedrus(272 c),"it is right to give the wolf too a hearing It is also characteristic of Plato that he prefers to put the strongest statement of the sophistic, im moralist, Machiavellian, Hobbesian, Nietzschean olitical ethics in the mouths of speakers who are historical justification of the procedure, that there exists not a shred of evidence that any conte or predecessor of Plato could state any horary theories which he assailed as well, as fully, as coherently, as systematically, as he has done it for them response to the challenge of Glaucon and Adeimantus, Socrates proposes to study the nature of justice and injustice writ large in the larger organism of the state, and to test the conceptions so won by their application to the individual also (86S E, 869 A). Plato, though he freely employs rudest form of hostile theol st, that he always goes on to re that they were ever formulated with the proper logical ons except by himself
INTRODUCTION vice (365 a-b) " that it is really and intrinsically better to be than to seem just.** It is Plato's method always to restate a satirized and controverted doctrine in its most plausible form before proceeding to a definitive refutation. '^ As he himself says in the Phaedrus (272 c), " it is right to give the wolf too a hearincr." It is also characteristic of Plato that he prefers to put the strongest statement of the sophistic, immoralist, Machiavellian, Hobbesian, Nietzschean political ethics in the mouths of speakers who are themselves on the side of the angels.** There is this historical justification of the procedure, that there exists not a shred of evidence that any contemporary or predecessor of Plato could state any of their theories which he assailed as well, as fully, as coherently, as systematically, as he has done it for them. In response to the challenge of Glaucon and Adeimantus, Socrates proposes to study the nature of justice and injustice wTit large in the larger organism of the state, and to test the conceptions so won by their application to the individual also (368 E, 369 a). Plato, though he freely employs • Cf. my Unity of Plato's Thought, p. 25, n. 164. " Cf. 362 A with 367 e. « Cf. my Unity of Plato's Thought, p. 8 : ... the elaborate refutations which Plato thinks fit to give of the crudest form of hostile theories sometimes produce an impression of unfairness upon modern critics. They forget two things : First, that he always goes on to restate the theory and refute its fair meaning ; second, that in the case of many doctrines combated by Plato there is no evidence that they were ever formulated with the proper logical qualifications except by himself." " Cf. 368 A-B
INTRODUCTION metaphor, symbolism, and myth, never bases his argument on them. a The figurative language here, as elsewhere, serves as a transition to, a framework for, an illustration of, the argument. Man is a social and political animal, and nothing but abstract dialectics can come of the attempt to isolate h psychology and ethics from the political and social environment that shapes them. b The question whether the main subject of the Republic is justice or the state is, as Proclus alread effect said. a tion of an ideal state was and actually occupies the larger part of the Republic. But it is ally subordinated I the proof that the just is the happy life. d It is idle to object that it is not true and cannot be proved that righteousness is verifiably h question still interests h discussion of it, whether it does or does not amount to a demonstration, still remains the most instructive and suggestive treatment of the theme in allliterature. There is little profit also in scrutinizing too curiously the unity or lack of unity of design in the Republic, the 2 .C my review of Barker. "Greek Political Theory, "in I. xxix. 1990. p by considering the temper of the C,e.g.. Rep 544 D-E, and infra, p. xxvi. Introduction Proclus cf On Rep p 349
INTRODUCTION metaphor, symbolism, and myth, never bases his argument on them." The figurative language here, as elsewhere, serves as a transition to, a framework for, an illustration of, the argument. Man is a social and political animal, and nothing but abstract dialectics can come of the attempt to isolate his psychology and ethics from the political and social environment that shapes them.*" The question whether the main subject of the Republic is justice or the state is, as Proclus already in effect said, a logomachy.'' The construction of an ideal state was a necessary part of Plato's design, and actually occupies the larger part of the Republic. But it is, as he repeatedly tells us, logically subordinated to the proof that the just is the happy life."* It is idle to object that it is not true and cannot be proved that righteousness is verifiably happiness. The question still interests humanity, and Plato's discussion of it, whether it does or does not amount to a demonstration, still remains the most instructive and suggestive treatment of the theme in all literature. There is little profit also in scrutinizing too curiously the unity or lack of unity of design in the Republic, the " Cf. my review of Barker, " Greek Political Theory," in the Philosophical Review, vol. xxix., 1920, p. 86 : " To say (on p. 119) that ' by considering the temper of the watchdog Plato arrives at the principle,' etc., is to make no allowance for Plato's literary art and his humour. Plato never really deduces his conclusions from the figurative analogies which he uses to illustrate them." * Cf., e.g.. Rep. 544 d-e, and infra, p. xxvi. ' Cf. the long discussion of Stallbaum in his Introduction to the Republic, pp. vii-lxv. For Proclus cf. On Rep. p. 349 (ed. of Kroll, p. 5 and p. 11). "* Cf. 352 D, 367 E, 369 a, 427 d, 445 a-b, 576 c, and especially 472 b with 588 b and 612 b